[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       amarok-devel
Subject:    Re: 2.3.1 or 2.4
From:       Ian Monroe <ian.monroe () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-04-08 14:12:43
Message-ID: q2vf680fec51004080712wdea3facfme094c35642b0ed5e () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Dan Meltzer
<parallelgrapefruit@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Leo Franchi <lfranchi@kde.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:33 AM, Nikolaj Hald Nielsen
>> <nhnfreespirit@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Abby has created another one of his great videos and uploaded it to
>>>> YouTube. It's titled "Amarok 2.3.1 First Look" atm, which got me
>>>> thinking if we really want the next version to be 2.3.1 considering
>>>> the changes we have in trunk already. Or should we go with 2.4?
>>>> Opinions?
>>>
>>> As I said already when discussing 2.3 vs 2.2.3 I think that making to
>>> big a jump in version numbers too often devalues the meaning of
>>> version numbers. And since we currently do not have a schedule that
>>> pushes out pure bugfix releases, and we have previously decided
>>> against going the KDE way (with a branch only for bugfix releases,
>>> which for us is the right decision I think) I would definitely go for
>>> 2.3.1 this time.
>>
>>
>> +1 from me. Going from 2.3.0 to 2.4.0 devalues the meaning of major
>> release numbers, imho.
>
> I think that if we went from 2.3.0 to 2.3.1 it would devalue the
> meaning of micro release numbers, we should probably call it
> 2.3.0.0.0.0.1, just to be safe.

Dan wins the thread, yet again.
_______________________________________________
Amarok-devel mailing list
Amarok-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]